BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Message
Author
User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#76 Post by Big Ben » Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:59 pm

I confess I'm not entirely sure how Riley came to view this an endorsement of all cops but even more so I'm shocked to see some people are taking this as straight laced and not downright farcical at times. I mean take the rather large Klansman whose entire purpose is to wheeze and be as dumb as possible (I don't have an issue with this I just think he's evidence of the film being intentionally over the top.). It's just not possible for me to take this as seriously as say, Do the Right Thing. Is it a straight comedy? No. But it's not a straight drama either. More so than anything the film felt more like a tool to state that racism in America (Especially in Cinema) has always been around and is just as dangerous as it was when Birth of a Nation was out.

Riley's comments are prescient too but I don't think Lee's intentions with this film are as nefarious as he makes them out to be.

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#77 Post by jindianajonz » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 am

Kirkinson wrote:
Wed Aug 15, 2018 3:18 pm
it's one of the reasons I didn't really mind the purely fictional addition of
SpoilerShow
the sting operation exposing the racist cop
because Patrice bluntly says the whole notion of a heroic black cop changing things from the inside is a fantasy, and it plays as such.
I'm surprised that nobody has touched on the "fantasy" aspect of the film, because to me that's what ties the whole thing together and explains all the perceived faults.
SpoilerShow
The scene Kirkinson references above is only one such fantasy mentioned in the movie; the other is when Patrice and Ron are discussing the blacksploitation genre. I read this whole film as Lee indulging in that fantasy, giving us the ideal world of some naive black cop to prove himself in, where the white people are either slapping him on the back for his great jokes or are easy-to-identify, frothing at the mouth racists. There's no middle ground in this film; all white people either fall on one side or the other (which, incidentally, parallels the equally fantastic duality of "good" uncle Toms or "bad" angry black men often seen in white folk and prominently in Birth of a Nation.)

When viewed like this, the whole bomb plot suddenly makes sense- it's vindication for Ron that such a racist system cannot stand on its own, and will inevitably collapse under its own weight. The bombers are so stupid and hate-filled that they kill themselves with their zealous ineptitude, and Ron doesn't even have to lift a finger. The racist cop practically sentences himself because he's so quick to brag about his own intolerance. And the icing on the cake is Ron's call to David Duke, revealing that he had the upper hand in a scene that would, in any other movie, provide the cathartic happy ending knowing that no self respecting villain could ever recover from such brazen humiliation.

But Lee doesn't stop end the movie there (and how could he?) Instead we cut to the modern day in an absolute gut-punch of a coda that puts to lie everything we've seen in the previous 120 minutes. David Duke is no longer a cartoonish Eric Foreman with a bad mustache, but a real life individual successfully channeling hate across the US with support from the highest levels of government. Hate wasn't eradicated, it just went into hiding. Maybe it was Adam Drivers presence, but I am reminded of the First Order returning from the boundaries of space in Force Awakens, which in hindsight almost seems prophetic given its pre-election release date. With these final moments, Lee is saying that although he has indulged in Ron's outlook, and humored his idea of changing the system from within, in the end he thinks it is all a fantasy.

User avatar
dda1996a
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:14 am

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#78 Post by dda1996a » Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:14 am

That coda brought me to tears, but the film itself felt as maybe Lee's most pedestrian work as a director. I mean it's a decent film and a rousing one, which is enough to justify its existence (even without the coda) but I was ready for a more rollicking and 70s blacksploitation vibe from the film. This is a much better film but even his Oldboy had more verve I felt. Am I the only one who felt this? I was really waiting to either laugh out loud (I chuckled here and there) but the film wasn't really thrilling and tense either.
Still I though the ridiculous story and the points it carried are enough to ensure this is a solid film, but I was left hoping for more...

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#79 Post by knives » Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:38 pm

Connecting to the above now that I've seen this the coda strikes me as a more successful reversal of The Last Laugh wherein we are given the fantasy first. Anyway more broadly my feelings are this is Lee at his most successful in a studio mode since Inside Man.

This is, basically, how you fictionalize history. It's really impressive how Lee and his writers transpose time to make the story exist at three moments at once. There is of course the time of the story, the time the movie is set in (the election), and now. The film starts with Baldwin doing his Trump and has a monologue taken from Gibson. The movie even quite powerfully reaches back to reconstruction in perhaps its most dramatically complex moment. It makes quite explicit the sense of the times changing but remaining the same that has been the subtext of the whole modern debate. Of course that is only one part of the film which is what makes this great. For example the whole thing with Flip is probably the most nuanced portrayal of the question for Jews of assimilation I have ever seen (I sincerely hope Driver wind the Oscar). There's also little things as well like the cute, racist wife which says so much with so little.

The thing uniting all of these disparate pieces is that what should be horrible or give cause for pause are ordinary. Unity as well is probably why this is Lee's most popular film since Inside Man. This is as epic in thematic scope as any of Lee's films but it has a cohesion that he usually doesn't care about. Red Hook Summer and Chiraq are probably better movies, but they are also messy as all get out punctuating great moments with odd bits of business. Look at how the talk on blaxploitation is edited in the most Lee way possible, but presented in a coherent and narratively sequential fashion. This is Lee in a polished studio mode bringing his stuff in a way that is acceptable to middle America which is good because that is in part where his message lies.

p.s. It also has the strongest and best written female character perhaps in Lee's entire career even though she is barely in it.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#80 Post by DarkImbecile » Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:52 pm

knives wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:38 pm
It's really impressive how Lee and his writers transpose time to make the story exist at three moments at once. There is of course the time of the story, the time the movie is set in (the election), and now.
I don’t follow; what’s the difference between the time of story and the time the movie is set in? How is that tied to the election (and which one?)?

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#81 Post by knives » Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:55 pm

The actual events of the movie took place in '79. He transposed them to '72 to make reference to the Nixon election.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#82 Post by DarkImbecile » Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:01 pm

Gotcha... I’d forgotten that element in the film, and hadn’t realized that the actual events took place so much later. You’d think having footage of Reagan race-baiting in the primaries in ‘79/‘80 might have served the film just as well if not better.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#83 Post by knives » Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:04 pm

Probably, but I suspect that Lee also wanted an excuse to make the film in the style of Coffy ect.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#84 Post by tenia » Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:48 pm

I found the Baldwin opening way more powerful and fascinatin that the multiple neverending coda that felt way too direct and obvious. I probably would have been fine with just the contemporary reference, but having 2 other cues after that was just too much.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#85 Post by nitin » Tue Jan 01, 2019 7:23 pm

Personally found this only slightly less terrible than Sorry to Bother You. Lee is clearly a better filmmaker than Riley, but apart from a handful of moments (the pan to reveal the shooting targets, Driver’s passing monologue, the 2 main speeches), this really did not work for me.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#86 Post by mfunk9786 » Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:49 pm

What do those two films have to do with one another?

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#87 Post by knives » Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:51 pm

Both leads do white voices to get ahead in their jobs?

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#88 Post by Big Ben » Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:59 pm

knives wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:55 pm
The actual events of the movie took place in '79. He transposed them to '72 to make reference to the Nixon election.
There was always some intimation that the Klan wanted to help get Nixon elected although I'm unsure how true that is. Given the whole Southern Strategy thing though I imagine the Klan didn't look down on Nixon.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#89 Post by nitin » Wed Jan 02, 2019 1:26 am

mfunk9786 wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:49 pm
What do those two films have to do with one another?
The fact that Riley had a go at Lee about his film? As I said, I don’t think either is much of a film personally (my comments about Riley’s film are in that thread) but Lee’s film at least has a few moments that work whereas I found Riley’s film comepletely inept from start to finish. And knives also has mentioned the other connection, if you can’t see that connection, I don’t know what to tell you.

But thanks for the insinuation from your high horse.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#90 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:30 am

knives wrote:
Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:51 pm
Both leads do white voices to get ahead in their jobs?
This is a much better (& funnier) answer than OP's!

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#91 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:30 pm

If you're a steelbook person (first of all, why?), this one is available on Amazon Italy right now and is pretty damn great looking:

Image

felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2018

#92 Post by felipe » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:10 pm

aox wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:21 am
felipe wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:33 pm
Big Ben wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 1:35 am


I think it should actually be "Best Picture About Racism Solved by White People." and then Best Other Picture.
So... Green Book and BlacKkKlansman?
BlacKkKlansman? A film make by a black man with a black lead protagonist?
A film with a black lead in which all the good white people go out of their ways to stop racism. The white people allow a black man to join the police. And then they allow a rookie to conduct an investigation, a rather serious one involving influential people. Other white cops are assigned to help and risk their lives because they realize racism must be stopped. The police even go as far as creating a set-up to frame the ONE racist cop in the force so he could go to prison (instead of, you know, protecting him or just reassigning him).
Maybe other people will see it differently, but isn't it basically about one black cop and the other dozen white cops who helped him? Would the lead character have gotten anything done had he not been granted permission by the white people?

User avatar
ianthemovie
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:51 am
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Awards Season 2018

#93 Post by ianthemovie » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:29 pm

felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:10 pm
A film with a black lead in which all the good white people go out of their ways to stop racism. The white people allow a black man to join the police. And then they allow a rookie to conduct an investigation, a rather serious one involving influential people. Other white cops are assigned to help and risk their lives because they realize racism must be stopped. The police even go as far as creating a set-up to frame the ONE racist cop in the force so he could go to prison (instead of, you know, protecting him or just reassigning him).
Maybe other people will see it differently, but isn't it basically about one black cop and the other dozen white cops who helped him? Would the lead character have gotten anything done had he not been granted permission by the white people?
Are you for real arguing that BlackKklansman ascribes agency to its white characters at the expense of its black ones? I don't know that such a description fits this or any of other Spike Lee movie I've ever seen, or that Lee is capable of making such a movie.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Awards Season 2018

#94 Post by domino harvey » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:29 pm

felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:10 pm
aox wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:21 am
felipe wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:33 pm

So... Green Book and BlacKkKlansman?
BlacKkKlansman? A film make by a black man with a black lead protagonist?
A film with a black lead in which all the good white people go out of their ways to stop racism. The white people allow a black man to join the police. And then they allow a rookie to conduct an investigation, a rather serious one involving influential people. Other white cops are assigned to help and risk their lives because they realize racism must be stopped. The police even go as far as creating a set-up to frame the ONE racist cop in the force so he could go to prison (instead of, you know, protecting him or just reassigning him).
Maybe other people will see it differently, but isn't it basically about one black cop and the other dozen white cops who helped him? Would the lead character have gotten anything done had he not been granted permission by the white people?
Are you familiar with the history of civil rights in America?

felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2018

#95 Post by felipe » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:32 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:29 pm
felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:10 pm
aox wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:21 am


BlacKkKlansman? A film make by a black man with a black lead protagonist?
A film with a black lead in which all the good white people go out of their ways to stop racism. The white people allow a black man to join the police. And then they allow a rookie to conduct an investigation, a rather serious one involving influential people. Other white cops are assigned to help and risk their lives because they realize racism must be stopped. The police even go as far as creating a set-up to frame the ONE racist cop in the force so he could go to prison (instead of, you know, protecting him or just reassigning him).
Maybe other people will see it differently, but isn't it basically about one black cop and the other dozen white cops who helped him? Would the lead character have gotten anything done had he not been granted permission by the white people?
Are you familiar with the history of civil rights in America?
Only from movies. Why?

felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2018

#96 Post by felipe » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:34 pm

ianthemovie wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:29 pm
felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:10 pm
A film with a black lead in which all the good white people go out of their ways to stop racism. The white people allow a black man to join the police. And then they allow a rookie to conduct an investigation, a rather serious one involving influential people. Other white cops are assigned to help and risk their lives because they realize racism must be stopped. The police even go as far as creating a set-up to frame the ONE racist cop in the force so he could go to prison (instead of, you know, protecting him or just reassigning him).
Maybe other people will see it differently, but isn't it basically about one black cop and the other dozen white cops who helped him? Would the lead character have gotten anything done had he not been granted permission by the white people?
Are you for real arguing that BlackKklansman ascribes agency to its white characters at the expense of its black ones? I don't know that such a description fits this or any of other Spike Lee movie I've ever seen, or that Lee is capable of making such a movie.
I'm not saying that that's the film Lee set out to do. But the film starts with a banner that reads "diversity wanted" or something of the sort hanging in front of the police station. From then on, everything the black lead did was because the white people allowed him to, wasn't it? He only joined the forced because the white people in the force let him.

I know most people might find it sinful to say something like that about a Spike Lee film. But would Ron Stallworth have pulled it off without help from the white people in the story? Would he have pulled it off without the permission from the white people in the story?

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Awards Season 2018

#97 Post by Big Ben » Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:53 pm

felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:34 pm

I'm not saying that that's the film Lee set out to do. But the film starts with a banner that reads "diversity wanted" or something of the sort hanging in front of the police station. From then on, everything the black lead did was because the white people allowed him to, wasn't it? He only joined the forced because the white people in the force let him.

I know most people might find it sinful to say something like that about a Spike Lee film. But would Ron Stallworth have pulled it off without help from the white people in the story? Would he have pulled it off without the permission from the white people in the story?
What? Of course Stallworth had help from white people but the initiative is still his and that doesn't make what he did any less extraordinary. His bravery is not somehow less important because white people helped. Stallworth also casually points out to Adam Driver's character that his indifference to the Klan hurts him as well so it's not a one way sort of deal here as he says something to the effect of "You've got skin in the game too." One of the points I've not seen spoken about enough is that the film makes it clear that extremism hurts everybody. Lee literally dedicated the film to a white woman murdered by Right Wing Extremists. It's very much a film made by a black man about black issues but the empathy it embodies is far larger than some people give it credit for.

felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2018

#98 Post by felipe » Wed Feb 27, 2019 9:11 pm

Big Ben wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:53 pm
felipe wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:34 pm

I'm not saying that that's the film Lee set out to do. But the film starts with a banner that reads "diversity wanted" or something of the sort hanging in front of the police station. From then on, everything the black lead did was because the white people allowed him to, wasn't it? He only joined the forced because the white people in the force let him.

I know most people might find it sinful to say something like that about a Spike Lee film. But would Ron Stallworth have pulled it off without help from the white people in the story? Would he have pulled it off without the permission from the white people in the story?
What? Of course Stallworth had help from white people but the initiative is still his and that doesn't make what he did any less extraordinary. His bravery is not somehow less important because white people helped. Stallworth also casually points out to Adam Driver's character that his indifference to the Klan hurts him as well so it's not a one way sort of deal here as he says something to the effect of "You've got skin in the game too." One of the points I've not seen spoken about enough is that the film makes it clear that extremism hurts everybody. Lee literally dedicated the film to a white woman murdered by Right Wing Extremists. It's very much a film made by a black man about black issues but the empathy it embodies is far larger than some people give it credit for.
I don't want to imply that Stallworth's feat wasn't extraordinary. he was brave. But do we agree that Stallworth would have accomplished little here without the support of his co-workers who were onboard his fight against racism?
Maybe other Stallworths even tried, but had no support, accomplished nothing and therefore we won't be seeing their stories told on film. Or maybe their cities didn't have a "minorites welcome" sign.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#99 Post by knives » Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:02 pm

You know the minorities wanted was a real thing at the time to the point where there was a successful comedy series about it?

You are not only talking out of clear ignorance of history, but also ignorance of the terms used. Agency doesn't mean independence. Rather it refers to initiative. Stallworth decided to join the police force. Stallworth decided to push for for promotion. Stallworth decided to go after the Klan. Just because society means working civilly with others doesn't make his actions lack agency. The purpose of the story wouldn't make sense with a failed attempt at being Stallworth, which you seem to suggest as the more interesting phenomena, a successful Stallworth who nevertheless can't prevent racism from still existing, as shown in his last scene, is the point.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: BlacKkKlansman (Spike Lee, 2018)

#100 Post by Big Ben » Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:25 pm

The coda makes it abundantly clear that one small victory hasn't stopped racism but rather that racism has become even more mainstream because it's officially sanctioned by the White House. This doesn't make the preceding film less relevant but it brings the occasionally stylized film into focus. It's a film about how the agency of a black man did good through and through.

Post Reply